ALEXANDER HARTELUST
v.
THOMAS SCHWARTZ
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Appellant Hartelust appealed from a bench trial judgment but failed to provide a transcript of the evidentiary hearing. The court affirmed because without a transcript, it cannot review whether the trial court's findings were supported by the evidence.
Without a transcript of the evidentiary hearing, the appellate court cannot evaluate the evidence and testimony presented at trial to determine whether the trial court's findings were well-founded, and therefore must affirm the judgment.
“we are unable to evaluate the evidence and testimony presented at trial to ascertain whether or not the trial court's findings and reasoning . . . were well-founded”
Establishes the fundamental reason why the appellate court cannot review findings of fact without a trial transcript
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThis case involved a non-jury trial on the merits before the trial court. The appellant challenged the trial court's findings of fact on appeal but di…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appellate Review Of Factual Findings cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed February 25, 2026. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D25-613 Lower Tribunal No. 24-183035-SP-05 Alexander Hartelust, Appellant, VS. Thomas Schwartz, Appellee. An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Luis Perez-Medina, Judge. Alexander Hartelust, in proper person. Thomas Schwartz, in proper person. Before LOGUE, BOKOR, and GOODEN, JJ. PER CURIAM. While the Appellant challenges the trial court's findings of fact reached after a non-jury trial on the merits, he provides no transcript of the evidentiary
hearing. In the absence of a transcript, “we are unable to evaluate the evidence and testimony presented at trial to ascertain whether or not the trial court's findings and reasoning . . . were well-founded." Shojaie v. Gables Court Pro. Ctr., Inc., 974 So. 2d 1140, 1142 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). In these circumstances, we are constrained to affirm. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979); All Cntys. Surplus LLC v. Flamingo S. Beach I Condo. Ass’n, 211 So. 3d 1096, 1098 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017). Affirmed. 2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Shohrie Shojaie v. Gables Court Prof'l Ctr., Inc., 974 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)
- ALL Cntys. Surplus LLC v. Flamingo S. Beach I Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 211 So. 3d 1096 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)